Libyan ambassador to U.S. pleads: Say something, Obama

posted at 5:38 pm on February 21, 2011 by Allahpundit

But why? The singular lesson about U.S. power during the Egyptian revolution was that pretty much no one cares what The One thinks. Does this guy honestly believe Qaddafi’s going to call off a carpet-bombing campaign designed to preserve his rule because Obama says he’s “disappointed” in him or whatever?

“I want the U.S. to tell the world and to work with the countries who love peace…they have to stop this,” Ambassador Ali Ojli said, suggesting that he had resigned his post, in an interview with Al Jazeera English.

“I would never ask us to intervene physically in Libya,” he said, but called on the Obama Administration to “take a strong position that what’s happening in libya must be stopped now…and to avoid giving the impression to the Arab world that the West “has only a materialist mind — they don’t care about human rights…except when it comes to their own interest.”

“You see them raising their voices about iran … because they have some interest in in Iran…. When it comes to other countries they don’t raise their voice,” he said, adding that the Arab and Muslim world won’t “trust america or the west if they behave that way.”

Whereas a strong denunciation of Qaddafi from Obama will lead Muslims to trust America? C’mon. As I’m writing this, Hillary has just issued a statement; I haven’t seen it yet, but no doubt all the “gravely concerned” I’s are dotted and the “we urge restraint” T’s are crossed. Talk is cheap, so let’s pick up a thread from the last Libya post: Should the UN/U.S./NATO intervene with air power to ground Qaddafi’s birds? Jonah Goldberg joins Dan Foster at the Corner in saying yes, but Ace’s co-blogger Gabe Malor makes a smart counterargument. If we start blowing Libyan jets out of the sky to protect demonstrators, are we obliged to do the same elsewhere? Even in Yemen, whose regime we count on to keep Al Qaeda’s increasingly dangerous chapter there at bay? Even in … Saudi Arabia?

By acting, I mean a response sufficiently forceful and direct to deter or prevent the Libyan regime from using its military resources to butcher its opponents. I have already seen reports that NATO has sternly warned Libya against further violence against its people. Making that credible could mean the declaration and enforcement of a no-fly zone over Libya, presumably by NATO, to prevent the use of military aircraft against the protestors. It could also mean a clear declaration that members of the regime and military will be held individually responsible for any future deaths. The U.S. should call for an urgent, immediate Security Council meeting and push for a strong resolution condeming Libya’s use of violence and authorizing targeted sanctions against the regime. Such steps could stand a chance of reversing the course of a rapidly deteriorating situation. An effective international response could not only save many Libyan lives, it might also send a powerful warning to other Arab leaders who might contemplate following suit against their own protest movements.

I don’t have any illusions that the outside world can control what happens in Libya, if the regime really wants to try to hold power by force. I don’t call for a direct military intervention. And I am keenly, painfully aware of all that could go wrong with even the kinds of responses I am recommending. But right now those fears are outweighed by the urgent imperative of trying to prevent the already bloody situation from getting much, much worse. This is not a peaceful democracy protest movement which the United States can best help by pressuring allied regimes from above, pushing for long-term and meaningful reform, and persuading the military to refrain from violence. It’s gone well beyond that already, and this time I find myself on the side of those demanding more forceful action before it’s too late. The steady stream of highly public defections from the regime suggest that rapid change is possible, yesterday’s speech by Saif al-Islam Qaddafi and today’s events suggest that so is terrible violence.

One alternative to U.S. intervention would be for Egypt to intervene somehow, either by enforcing a no-fly zone in the spirit of revolutionary fraternity (and a payoff from the west, no doubt) and/or by granting amnesty across the border to Libyan troops who want to defect. In fact, there’s already some religious cover for them to act: According to the Guardian, the Muslim Brotherhood’s “spiritual leader” has issued a fatwa calling on Libyan troops to kill Qaddafi. The obvious problem with an Egyptian intervention is that if Qaddafi holds on somehow, he and Egypt are at war. And, per the VDH post that I linked earlier, we’d best be careful about inviting too much Egyptian interest in its next-door neighbor given the oil interests at play. Or is that actually less of a bug and more of a feature? Libyan society may be in no condition to continue oil production in the near future after the shooting stops. Egypt, a more stable platform even given the recent revolution, might be.

In lieu of an exit question, let me quote David Petraeus’s most famous utterance: “Tell me how this ends.”

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Comments

Figures. Mubarak was an American ally, so Obama would move heaven and earth to get him removed whereas Gaddafi is a dictator, hence he’d remain silent if not actively discourage him. Why did these revolutions not take place during Bush’s time?

I just want to know where our Military Commanders and Leaders are. Where is the CIA and our Special Op’s, and where is Petraus? Our troops are being surrounded in Iraqi theater and nobody but Misses Clintoon has anything to say?

Said a prayer to keep your kids in particular–and the rest of our forces–safe. But whatever Odummer says will be the wrong thing and exacerbate the situation. I am convinced he listens to the advice of his handlers and does exactly the opposite…if this is not the case, the only other conclusion is his handlers are maroons…to me, an even scarier prospect than the president being completely totally flippin’ batchit insane.
I’d love to hear some other opinions. I have believed, since the day I heard he was running for president, that his real agenda was the complete, utter downfall of this country, but as this whole thing is playing out in the mid-east, I’m beginning to wonder if this is exactly the opposite effect he was hoping for (ie: downfall of U.S., uplift of radical Islam). Am I being too optimistic in thinking that maybe, just maybe there are more “rationale” Muslims than there are radicals, and they are trying to effect reform?????? Is that even possible??? I’m only asking, please hold the fruit. Throwing it at me is wasteful, and the cost of food is going up mighty fast! (OT: bought Romaine lettuce today. Price has doubled in 6 months)

I admit there’s a better moral case for Egypt to invade Libya than there was for, say, Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait, but it would still be awfully awkward for the US to countenance it in public. As for NATO, I really haven’t a clue what its mission is, but at least it would serve as a passable cover for US preferences. (Forget about the UN or the Arab League doing anything to deter a desperate regime from saving its hide by any means necessary.)

Not sure the Italians would be crazy about participating, but you never know. Who’s the Italian war minister these days? I bet she’s hot.

Can the White Houose truly mind if these major Oil exported get shut down by radicals? Is there a deliberate move to deprive the west of energy – why are we commiting economic suicide by not moving toward stopping the single handed way Obama is shutting down oil? Are we really thinking we can survive this crash with oil through the roof? Venuzuala and Iran must be drooling with what Obama’s policies mean for them. Russia North Korea and China must be watching with more that a simple interest in our self-inflicted weakness to be able to wage a war for survival. Just wondering….

He’s too busy getting into states affairs to worry about world affairs. He can’t help it, it’s just the community organizer in him. You know, someone acted stupidly or something and the One has to come save the day.

You know what? Screw Libya. And its leader, and its ambassador to the UN. Screw Egypt, screw Mubarak, screw the Tunisians, the Algerians, the Yemenis, and whatever other third-world sh!thole Arab country mounts an uprising next.

Your cave-dweller men chant “death to America” at the slightest provocation, your hideous women ululate in the streets when our innocents are murdered, and your “soldiers” blow up buses and pizzerias, when they’re not using children as human shields.

GO GET YOUR OWN DAMN POLICEMAN.

You cozy up to the Russians, you collude with other tinpot Arab dictators… GET THEM TO SPEAK UP ON YOUR BEHALF, YOU EVIL HALF-EVOLVED S.O.B.’s.

Just a question but does anyone know if there are rumblings in Iraq yet? Everywhere else in the Middle East seems to be exploding.

sharrukin on February 21, 2011 at 6:17 PM

Yes, and I think it’s more than a little disconcerting that all of the places where this type of disruption has been occurring (Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Tunisia, Jordan) have all been places where the government has been friendly to the West.

Even Qadaffi has been taking a more pro-western stance the last five years or so.

Meanwhile there doesn’t seem to be any problem at all in Syria, and what little there has been in Iran, seems to have petered out already.

Hmmm….

And what the hell is that Libyan Ambassador talking about? “You see them raising their voices about iran … because they have some interest in in Iran?” Exactly when did the Obama administration say anything during the unrest in Iran a year and a half ago?

Also notice that the spiritual leader of the “peaceful” Muslim Brotherhood has issued a Fatwa calling for the assassination of Qaddafi.

Though not popular uprisings, I wonder if folks thought that great positive change was coming about when Ernst Roehm was taken out or Leon Trotsky?

Dr. ZhivBlago on February 21, 2011 at 9:58 PM

Those are good analogies, actually.

From Stratfor:

Seif al-Islam said efforts were under way to create small Islamic emirates in various parts of the country, such as Al Bayda and Darna. Since then, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini was quoted as saying, “I’m extremely concerned about the self-proclamation of the so-called Islamic Emirate of Benghazi. Would you imagine having an Islamic Arab emirate at the borders of Europe? This would be a really serious threat.”

I am not sure how orchestrated this is, but many of these groups are in contact with each other that much is certain. Seems like the more Islamic groups are sweeping to power throughout the Middle East with only the militaries and dictators holding them back.

The sad truth here is that all these Arab countries would be much better off today if they had stayed European colonies. They would have a working education system, an economy, freedom for their citizens and the rule of law.

Maybe they shouldn’t be sheltering the Lockerbie bomber. The US should just let that country destroy itself. So the Muslim Brotherhood would be worse than Qaddafi? Don’t think so. I hope Qaddafi gets what he deserves.

The Arabs don’t sell us oil because they like us, they sell us oil because they must. Simply put, they need the revenue to bribe their people into not rioting. Who ever is in charge will see to it that the first order of business is to get the wells pumping and to keep the wells pumping.

I think his plea is legitimate. And probably Obama should be consistent. Making a statement for the people won’t make a difference, but it still affirms our foreign policy that we do not ignore violations of human rights.

Comrade Zero just can’t figure out if he’s Shia or Sunni. Figuring that out was above his pay grade. Matter of fact his entire career was above his pay grade. He just sounded good reading Karl Marx aloud to his other budding Communists.

The basic premise of this story is totally dishonest, Allah. What a cheap shot. The White House has strongly condemned the violence of the Libyan regime against its own people. To suggest that is it just standing back and doing nothing is absurd, but you must know this.

No one knows how things are going to turn out, and the White House is exactly right to not be seen as a meddler in the Maghreb (you’ll have to look that one up, HotAirHeads.).

He’s too busy getting into states affairs to worry about world affairs. He can’t help it, it’s just the community organizer in him. You know, someone acted stupidly or something and the One has to come save the day.

Scrappy on February 21, 2011 at 7:55 PM

No, actually, he’s probably been too busy skiing with his family over the long weekend….

The basic premise of this story is totally dishonest, Allah. What a cheap shot. The White House has strongly condemned the violence of the Libyan regime against its own people. To suggest that is it just standing back and doing nothing is absurd, but you must know this.

No one knows how things are going to turn out, and the White House is exactly right to not be seen as a meddler in the Maghreb (you’ll have to look that one up, HotAirHeads.).

bifidis on February 22, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Hey idiot – the basic premise of the “story” is Libya’s Ambassador stating:

“I want the U.S. to tell the world and to work with the countries who love peace…they have to stop this,” Ambassador Ali Ojli said, suggesting that he had resigned his post, in an interview with Al Jazeera English.
“I would never ask us to intervene physically in Libya,” he said, but called on the Obama Administration to “take a strong position that what’s happening in libya must be stopped now…and to avoid giving the impression to the Arab world that the West “has only a materialist mind — they don’t care about human rights…except when it comes to their own interest.”

You once again missed the issue and are desperately trying to appear relevant and/or “bright”. You are neither.

Now – craft one of those nifty posts, send it off to the Ambassador and/or innternational community and let them know, all is well – regardless of what they hear and see. Let them know their plea is empty and is nothing more than an attempt to confuse and bait “Hotairheads”.